- From: Andreas Rossberg <rossberg@google.com>
- Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 17:18:30 +0200
- To: Dean Landolt <dean@deanlandolt.com>
- Cc: David Bruant <bruant.d@gmail.com>, "Mark S. Miller" <erights@google.com>, "public-script-coord@w3.org" <public-script-coord@w3.org>, Mark Miller <erights@gmail.com>, Dean Tribble <tribble@e-dean.com>, es-discuss <es-discuss@mozilla.org>
On 26 April 2013 16:25, Dean Landolt <dean@deanlandolt.com> wrote: > The fundamental controversy, as Juan just noted, is how to precisely > identify a promise in order to do either of these two things. This problem > isn't quite so clean cut, but it's much more important to solve. I've been > trying to bring some attention to it over the last few days -- I hope it's > clear that a `then` method is not enough to identify a promise language > construct -- this will subtly break existing code (e.g. casperjs). Let me note that this is not the fundamental controversy (not for me, anyway). The fundamental controversy is whether there should be any irregularity at all, as is unavoidably introduced by implicit flattening. The problem you describe just makes the negative effect of that irregularity worse. /Andreas
Received on Friday, 26 April 2013 15:19:18 UTC